2% pay raise in Oct 2020
08-31-2020 | 07:58 AM
#191
Banned
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 0
Boy,
there's been a lot of silly comments.
In no apparent order, or reference.
Trust fund would be managed by the hired guns FedEx currently pays big $$ to manage our existing Trust funds. No way it'd be 100% stocks.
Speaking of 100% stocks. It's not the Returns on Stocks that would make a variable plan self-funding. Rather the requirement to contribute a set percentage of payroll to this new Trust fund. Unlike our Current trust plan where the hired guns evaluate the funding levels and either contribute, or skip. (As an example, consider our last quarters earning reports. In the footnotes, a $794M pension loss, but no plans to contribute additional funds to the Pension Trust)
Pension Plans it's not Burger King. It's not, I'd like 80% of Option C with a side of option B cash over cap. It's not, I like FDA which allows a sidestep of some of the expense for Pensions because it's more of a pay as you go kinda thing...subject to renewal each Contract Cycle. Requiring Negotiations to improve. Allowing Management to argue, $$ now in Salary or deferred $$ in the FDA.
FDA's is something our NC has said they considered, but went with the Once and it's done option.
A Variable Plan isn't set in concrete. Absolutely nothing impossible about perhaps improving the Floor or modifying the earnings cap in subsequent contracts.
Seem to be a lot of Aging FedEx'ers with the impression that a change to the FAE in our Traditional Plan will be retroactive. Hey, the VB plan doesn't do much for me, let's change the FAE to 300 or 360. Shoot, my FAE is already above that.
Well, whether it's a transition to a new FAE, an FDA value, VB plan. It's gonna be, just that. A transition. As of Jan 1 2023 our new A plan Benefit formula takes effect (in reality quite likely June 1st to align with what I think if FedEx's FY, but I didn't look it up).
So, that means, improved A plan will be in effect for those retiring in 2024. If it's FAE up to 360 (which is really the min I'd like to see it at, as opposed to the 300'sh the DC limit is likely to be in 3 years) Well, it won't be a $180k pension for those retiring in 2024. But likely a $140k pension. (FWIW, a 2% floor VB would add another $7,200 to the $130)
A Traditional Pension is superior to a year by year $$ based pension accumulation. The year by year becomes superior if you're lucky enough to have been young enough to continue working beyond the YOS cap. Also superior if the year by year has an increasing salary cap as opposed to the traditional
there's been a lot of silly comments.
In no apparent order, or reference.
Trust fund would be managed by the hired guns FedEx currently pays big $$ to manage our existing Trust funds. No way it'd be 100% stocks.
Speaking of 100% stocks. It's not the Returns on Stocks that would make a variable plan self-funding. Rather the requirement to contribute a set percentage of payroll to this new Trust fund. Unlike our Current trust plan where the hired guns evaluate the funding levels and either contribute, or skip. (As an example, consider our last quarters earning reports. In the footnotes, a $794M pension loss, but no plans to contribute additional funds to the Pension Trust)
Pension Plans it's not Burger King. It's not, I'd like 80% of Option C with a side of option B cash over cap. It's not, I like FDA which allows a sidestep of some of the expense for Pensions because it's more of a pay as you go kinda thing...subject to renewal each Contract Cycle. Requiring Negotiations to improve. Allowing Management to argue, $$ now in Salary or deferred $$ in the FDA.
FDA's is something our NC has said they considered, but went with the Once and it's done option.
A Variable Plan isn't set in concrete. Absolutely nothing impossible about perhaps improving the Floor or modifying the earnings cap in subsequent contracts.
Seem to be a lot of Aging FedEx'ers with the impression that a change to the FAE in our Traditional Plan will be retroactive. Hey, the VB plan doesn't do much for me, let's change the FAE to 300 or 360. Shoot, my FAE is already above that.
Well, whether it's a transition to a new FAE, an FDA value, VB plan. It's gonna be, just that. A transition. As of Jan 1 2023 our new A plan Benefit formula takes effect (in reality quite likely June 1st to align with what I think if FedEx's FY, but I didn't look it up).
So, that means, improved A plan will be in effect for those retiring in 2024. If it's FAE up to 360 (which is really the min I'd like to see it at, as opposed to the 300'sh the DC limit is likely to be in 3 years) Well, it won't be a $180k pension for those retiring in 2024. But likely a $140k pension. (FWIW, a 2% floor VB would add another $7,200 to the $130)
A Traditional Pension is superior to a year by year $$ based pension accumulation. The year by year becomes superior if you're lucky enough to have been young enough to continue working beyond the YOS cap. Also superior if the year by year has an increasing salary cap as opposed to the traditional
What cracks me up the most is they think they know more than the professionals that looked at this entire thing. The outside consultants and all.
08-31-2020 | 08:26 AM
#192
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Boy,
there's been a lot of silly comments.
In no apparent order, or reference.
Trust fund would be managed by the hired guns FedEx currently pays big $$ to manage our existing Trust funds. No way it'd be 100% stocks.
Speaking of 100% stocks. It's not the Returns on Stocks that would make a variable plan self-funding. Rather the requirement to contribute a set percentage of payroll to this new Trust fund. Unlike our Current trust plan where the hired guns evaluate the funding levels and either contribute, or skip. (As an example, consider our last quarters earning reports. In the footnotes, a $794M pension loss, but no plans to contribute additional funds to the Pension Trust)
Pension Plans it's not Burger King. It's not, I'd like 80% of Option C with a side of option B cash over cap. It's not, I like FDA which allows a sidestep of some of the expense for Pensions because it's more of a pay as you go kinda thing...subject to renewal each Contract Cycle. Requiring Negotiations to improve. Allowing Management to argue, $$ now in Salary or deferred $$ in the FDA.
FDA's is something our NC has said they considered, but went with the Once and it's done option.
A Variable Plan isn't set in concrete. Absolutely nothing impossible about perhaps improving the Floor or modifying the earnings cap in subsequent contracts.
Seem to be a lot of Aging FedEx'ers with the impression that a change to the FAE in our Traditional Plan will be retroactive. Hey, the VB plan doesn't do much for me, let's change the FAE to 300 or 360. Shoot, my FAE is already above that.
Well, whether it's a transition to a new FAE, an FDA value, VB plan. It's gonna be, just that. A transition. As of Jan 1 2023 our new A plan Benefit formula takes effect (in reality quite likely June 1st to align with what I think if FedEx's FY, but I didn't look it up).
So, that means, improved A plan will be in effect for those retiring in 2024. If it's FAE up to 360 (which is really the min I'd like to see it at, as opposed to the 300'sh the DC limit is likely to be in 3 years) Well, it won't be a $180k pension for those retiring in 2024. But likely a $140k pension. (FWIW, a 2% floor VB would add another $7,200 to the $130)
A Traditional Pension is superior to a year by year $$ based pension accumulation. The year by year becomes superior if you're lucky enough to have been young enough to continue working beyond the YOS cap. Also superior if the year by year has an increasing salary cap as opposed to the traditional
there's been a lot of silly comments.
In no apparent order, or reference.
Trust fund would be managed by the hired guns FedEx currently pays big $$ to manage our existing Trust funds. No way it'd be 100% stocks.
Speaking of 100% stocks. It's not the Returns on Stocks that would make a variable plan self-funding. Rather the requirement to contribute a set percentage of payroll to this new Trust fund. Unlike our Current trust plan where the hired guns evaluate the funding levels and either contribute, or skip. (As an example, consider our last quarters earning reports. In the footnotes, a $794M pension loss, but no plans to contribute additional funds to the Pension Trust)
Pension Plans it's not Burger King. It's not, I'd like 80% of Option C with a side of option B cash over cap. It's not, I like FDA which allows a sidestep of some of the expense for Pensions because it's more of a pay as you go kinda thing...subject to renewal each Contract Cycle. Requiring Negotiations to improve. Allowing Management to argue, $$ now in Salary or deferred $$ in the FDA.
FDA's is something our NC has said they considered, but went with the Once and it's done option.
A Variable Plan isn't set in concrete. Absolutely nothing impossible about perhaps improving the Floor or modifying the earnings cap in subsequent contracts.
Seem to be a lot of Aging FedEx'ers with the impression that a change to the FAE in our Traditional Plan will be retroactive. Hey, the VB plan doesn't do much for me, let's change the FAE to 300 or 360. Shoot, my FAE is already above that.
Well, whether it's a transition to a new FAE, an FDA value, VB plan. It's gonna be, just that. A transition. As of Jan 1 2023 our new A plan Benefit formula takes effect (in reality quite likely June 1st to align with what I think if FedEx's FY, but I didn't look it up).
So, that means, improved A plan will be in effect for those retiring in 2024. If it's FAE up to 360 (which is really the min I'd like to see it at, as opposed to the 300'sh the DC limit is likely to be in 3 years) Well, it won't be a $180k pension for those retiring in 2024. But likely a $140k pension. (FWIW, a 2% floor VB would add another $7,200 to the $130)
A Traditional Pension is superior to a year by year $$ based pension accumulation. The year by year becomes superior if you're lucky enough to have been young enough to continue working beyond the YOS cap. Also superior if the year by year has an increasing salary cap as opposed to the traditional
There are several other alternatives. I have no issue with renegotiating retirement benefits. Most of us have around 3-5 contract cycles to deal with. It depends on length of the contract, time it takes to achieve a contract, etc. In the past 20 years, we’ve really only had two (2006 and 2015). Im not counting the extension of the 2006 contract (bridge agreement). In short, it’s just not a deal killer to have to renegotiate our pension. One of the allures of the variable plan was the fact that it wouldn’t have to be negotiated every time. But, as we all know, we would. There would be attempts to increase the benefit, and we all know that.
So, let’s have a real survey and just ask direct questions. Which one would you prefer for us to push for: Variable, improvements to our current fund, flat dollar, B fund improvements? If we have overwhelming support of the variable plan, I’ll support the majority. I think we all know that won’t happen despite the relentless hard sell and the amazing amount of $$$$ we’ve spent so far on this plan. We present this to the company and we get the Heisman.
08-31-2020 | 08:30 AM
#193
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Thank you for saying it better than I could. Its amazing to watch this site and JetFlyers and see the pure lies and misconceptions many say about any A plan that is not our curreA plan. Im sure glad they fly airplanes for a living because they wouldnt have any business as a financial advisor.
What cracks me up the most is they think they know more than the professionals that looked at this entire thing. The outside consultants and all.
What cracks me up the most is they think they know more than the professionals that looked at this entire thing. The outside consultants and all.
08-31-2020 | 09:16 AM
#194
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,424
Likes: 0
From: 757 Capt
So, let’s have a real survey and just ask direct questions. Which one would you prefer for us to push for: Variable, improvements to our current fund, flat dollar, B fund improvements? If we have overwhelming support of the variable plan, I’ll support the majority. I think we all know that won’t happen despite the relentless hard sell and the amazing amount of $$$$ we’ve spent so far on this plan. We present this to the company and we get the Heisman.
The amazing amount of $$$$. You mean spending money on analyzing retirements\actual actuarial data. Wouldn't it be much better to simply look at the profits of FedEx and pound on the table that FedEx can afford it, rather than looking behind the curtains to see if regulatory changes might've impacted Pensions?
Lot of people seem enamored with UPS and FDA's solution. Okay with me, except for the disparity between FO and Capt retirements.
No issues at all with going with a 1% Pension and an FDA value. Currently, our equivalent FDA value is $5,200. Let's shoot for a 20% increase on our A plan. That would put it at $6,240. (Not doing the math but does that put it 40% greater than UPSs?). No way to predict how the DC limit is going to be adjusted for future years, but if the trend continues, should be about 309k at my WAG of a transition point. So, 2% VB floor would be $6,169. A 2.1% floor would be $6,478.
And, I want BOTH an improvement in our B plan as well as our Defined Benefit. Not an either or. But that's just me.
08-31-2020 | 11:37 AM
#195
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Really, you'll support the majority. What if the majority votes in something you don't agree with? Will you still support it?
The amazing amount of $$$$. You mean spending money on analyzing retirements\actual actuarial data. Wouldn't it be much better to simply look at the profits of FedEx and pound on the table that FedEx can afford it, rather than looking behind the curtains to see if regulatory changes might've impacted Pensions?
Lot of people seem enamored with UPS and FDA's solution. Okay with me, except for the disparity between FO and Capt retirements.
No issues at all with going with a 1% Pension and an FDA value. Currently, our equivalent FDA value is $5,200. Let's shoot for a 20% increase on our A plan. That would put it at $6,240. (Not doing the math but does that put it 40% greater than UPSs?). No way to predict how the DC limit is going to be adjusted for future years, but if the trend continues, should be about 309k at my WAG of a transition point. So, 2% VB floor would be $6,169. A 2.1% floor would be $6,478.
And, I want BOTH an improvement in our B plan as well as our Defined Benefit. Not an either or. But that's just me.
The amazing amount of $$$$. You mean spending money on analyzing retirements\actual actuarial data. Wouldn't it be much better to simply look at the profits of FedEx and pound on the table that FedEx can afford it, rather than looking behind the curtains to see if regulatory changes might've impacted Pensions?
Lot of people seem enamored with UPS and FDA's solution. Okay with me, except for the disparity between FO and Capt retirements.
No issues at all with going with a 1% Pension and an FDA value. Currently, our equivalent FDA value is $5,200. Let's shoot for a 20% increase on our A plan. That would put it at $6,240. (Not doing the math but does that put it 40% greater than UPSs?). No way to predict how the DC limit is going to be adjusted for future years, but if the trend continues, should be about 309k at my WAG of a transition point. So, 2% VB floor would be $6,169. A 2.1% floor would be $6,478.
And, I want BOTH an improvement in our B plan as well as our Defined Benefit. Not an either or. But that's just me.
Paying money to analyze actuarial data is money well spent. Paying Blitzstein and Cheiron for their input on the variable pension was a f’ing waste. Very few of us have ever wanted this scheme, and the company laughed at us when we presented it. And they just keep selling it.
Not many here want UPS exact pension! IT’S THE CONCEPT that’s interesting. No One wants $4300/per year. You don’t have to separate Capts and FOs. We don’t now. I would have no problem tying yearly amounts to FAE.
300k FAE= 100% of the annual flat dollar amount
270k FAE= 90%
240k FAE= 80%
Etc.
There are many ways to make this work.
If indeed the FDA concept reduced FedEx’s pension liability, they may be more inclined to have serious negotiations. I’m not saying this plan is viable or achievable, but it’s incredible simple. No stabilization fund that the company doesn’t want to provide. No hurdle rates. Just a guaranteed benefit like we get today. Put together right, this is a plan we could all agree to (well most of us).
The only area that I agree with you is pushing for A and B gains. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.
09-01-2020 | 06:20 AM
#197
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,424
Likes: 0
From: 757 Capt
The DC delta at the $285k 401(a)(17) annual compensation limit is $8550. At "only" $200k income, the 3% difference is $6k. I don't personally find that 'insignificant', but will concede its a matter of age, longevity and perspective...
Your point about defined benefit while retiring as a PFO is taken. No denying your 2% FAE provides greater life/schedule flexibility, however, as we have had a number of pilots who upgrade solely to punch their CA FDA retirement ticket and retire shortly thereafter. Our junior CA is an 8/15 hire, and our youngest CAs are 36; very very few will be 'forced' into retiring as a First Officer at UPS without an opportunity to lock in the FDA.
My post isn't meant to be a "ours is better than yours", but rather an academic compare-and-contrast of the differences between the entire retirement benefit we both receive as we both desire to further increase that benefit. There's really no 'wrong' way to go about doing that...
Your point about defined benefit while retiring as a PFO is taken. No denying your 2% FAE provides greater life/schedule flexibility, however, as we have had a number of pilots who upgrade solely to punch their CA FDA retirement ticket and retire shortly thereafter. Our junior CA is an 8/15 hire, and our youngest CAs are 36; very very few will be 'forced' into retiring as a First Officer at UPS without an opportunity to lock in the FDA.
My post isn't meant to be a "ours is better than yours", but rather an academic compare-and-contrast of the differences between the entire retirement benefit we both receive as we both desire to further increase that benefit. There's really no 'wrong' way to go about doing that...
Using the final A plan FDA values, Brown's A plan value is $110,00 and $88,000 respectively.
If you use a 4% withdrawal rate, value comes in at $137k\$115k or $131.4k\109.4k.
Advantage for Brown is that more $$ will be in an individuals hands\inheritable. Smaller impact should the Pension be handed over to the PBGC (would submit to you that the odds of that happening are wicked low, probably about the same odds as my 50 year old ass throwing 95 mph fastballs)
The actual results depend a lot on Career earnings, and individual decisions to upgrade\not upgrade.
And this outlier, doesn't take into consideration that a fair number of FedEx pilots max out their disability accounts at some point in time and then have their annual sick leave deposited into their B plan or paid as cash over cap. Takes 10+ years to get there, but even a NB FO who starts using 30% of his sick leave banks another $10k.
The greater YOS one has at Brown, the better off you are. Period dot.
09-01-2020 | 06:30 AM
#198
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,424
Likes: 0
From: 757 Capt
Yep, impossible to find anyone who voted for TA2015-and yet it passed.
No one's in favor of our variable plan, and yet our Union seems to be acting like there's more than 1 or 2 people in favor
Well, the polls didn't SPECIFICALLY ask which option I wanted.
On Several occasions, I've commented that a Traditional Plan is FAR superior to our proposed plan.
You'd have to be a complete IDIOT, to prefer a VB plan or an FDA plan to a High 5 Plan.
Do I care whether we modify our future Pension Benefit calculations to a VB plan or a 1%\FDA plan like UPS's. NO.
There's no Good way to poll this issue. In a way, it's kind of like the idiotic way ALPA National polled the Age 60 change. Question 1, Do you want to change the regulated age....overwhelmingly NO. Question 2, If ALPA thinks the regulated AGE change is coming like it or not, do you want ALPA to modify our position and support it to minimize regulatory changes....overwhelmingly YES.
Perhaps Question 1 could be: Do you think FedEx Mgt views Pension Plans as an excessive cost and would prefer to eliminate the Pension altogether.
If Yes:
Would you prefer a VB plan, which has the potential to share in the Investment Returns generated by funds in the Pension Trust?
Or
a 1%\FDA plan like UPS, although our FDA value should be a formula tied to the DC limit.
(Oh no, More Math)
No one's in favor of our variable plan, and yet our Union seems to be acting like there's more than 1 or 2 people in favor
Well, the polls didn't SPECIFICALLY ask which option I wanted.
On Several occasions, I've commented that a Traditional Plan is FAR superior to our proposed plan.
You'd have to be a complete IDIOT, to prefer a VB plan or an FDA plan to a High 5 Plan.
Do I care whether we modify our future Pension Benefit calculations to a VB plan or a 1%\FDA plan like UPS's. NO.
There's no Good way to poll this issue. In a way, it's kind of like the idiotic way ALPA National polled the Age 60 change. Question 1, Do you want to change the regulated age....overwhelmingly NO. Question 2, If ALPA thinks the regulated AGE change is coming like it or not, do you want ALPA to modify our position and support it to minimize regulatory changes....overwhelmingly YES.
Perhaps Question 1 could be: Do you think FedEx Mgt views Pension Plans as an excessive cost and would prefer to eliminate the Pension altogether.
If Yes:
Would you prefer a VB plan, which has the potential to share in the Investment Returns generated by funds in the Pension Trust?
Or
a 1%\FDA plan like UPS, although our FDA value should be a formula tied to the DC limit.
(Oh no, More Math)
09-01-2020 | 08:46 AM
#199
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Yep, impossible to find anyone who voted for TA2015-and yet it passed.
No one's in favor of our variable plan, and yet our Union seems to be acting like there's more than 1 or 2 people in favor
Well, the polls didn't SPECIFICALLY ask which option I wanted.
On Several occasions, I've commented that a Traditional Plan is FAR superior to our proposed plan.
You'd have to be a complete IDIOT, to prefer a VB plan or an FDA plan to a High 5 Plan.
Do I care whether we modify our future Pension Benefit calculations to a VB plan or a 1%\FDA plan like UPS's. NO.
There's no Good way to poll this issue. In a way, it's kind of like the idiotic way ALPA National polled the Age 60 change. Question 1, Do you want to change the regulated age....overwhelmingly NO. Question 2, If ALPA thinks the regulated AGE change is coming like it or not, do you want ALPA to modify our position and support it to minimize regulatory changes....overwhelmingly YES.
Perhaps Question 1 could be: Do you think FedEx Mgt views Pension Plans as an excessive cost and would prefer to eliminate the Pension altogether.
If Yes:
Would you prefer a VB plan, which has the potential to share in the Investment Returns generated by funds in the Pension Trust?
Or
a 1%\FDA plan like UPS, although our FDA value should be a formula tied to the DC limit.
(Oh no, More Math)
No one's in favor of our variable plan, and yet our Union seems to be acting like there's more than 1 or 2 people in favor
Well, the polls didn't SPECIFICALLY ask which option I wanted.
On Several occasions, I've commented that a Traditional Plan is FAR superior to our proposed plan.
You'd have to be a complete IDIOT, to prefer a VB plan or an FDA plan to a High 5 Plan.
Do I care whether we modify our future Pension Benefit calculations to a VB plan or a 1%\FDA plan like UPS's. NO.
There's no Good way to poll this issue. In a way, it's kind of like the idiotic way ALPA National polled the Age 60 change. Question 1, Do you want to change the regulated age....overwhelmingly NO. Question 2, If ALPA thinks the regulated AGE change is coming like it or not, do you want ALPA to modify our position and support it to minimize regulatory changes....overwhelmingly YES.
Perhaps Question 1 could be: Do you think FedEx Mgt views Pension Plans as an excessive cost and would prefer to eliminate the Pension altogether.
If Yes:
Would you prefer a VB plan, which has the potential to share in the Investment Returns generated by funds in the Pension Trust?
Or
a 1%\FDA plan like UPS, although our FDA value should be a formula tied to the DC limit.
(Oh no, More Math)
Anyway, we’ve beat this one to death.
09-01-2020 | 08:54 AM
#200
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,481
Likes: 23
From: Crewmember
I cannot understand why I have not talked to one pilot who supports the VB plan, but the MEC is all in favor of it.
Do they have blinders on?
Do they really think they are smarter than us?
Do they think since they wasted ONE MILLION DOLLARS of our dues, they have to support it?
I can't, for the life of me, understand why our reps won't listen to us.
Oh, wait, I know, it is because ALPA makes it so hard to get rid of them; so they think they can do whatever they please with our money and our futures.
Do they have blinders on?
Do they really think they are smarter than us?
Do they think since they wasted ONE MILLION DOLLARS of our dues, they have to support it?
I can't, for the life of me, understand why our reps won't listen to us.
Oh, wait, I know, it is because ALPA makes it so hard to get rid of them; so they think they can do whatever they please with our money and our futures.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
